About your Search

20120901
20120930
STATION
CSPAN2 80
LANGUAGE
English 80
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 80 (some duplicates have been removed)
in the united states. welcoming speakers for the director in libya and who spent a long time studying and the professor emeritus of the school on the studies in the university he has many accomplishments and has written many books but flumes the largest achievement as many ph.d. students. he said his apology he won't be liable to attend this conference because of the tragic events of the public messaging on the security situation in libya would be handled by the office of the secretary said he cannot come. we had intended this event for the situation of libya. a discussion of the possible solutions of what has gone on on the ground on the security situation and the academic meeting inviting all of your to express'. and the tragic events of the the situation on the ground and is expected. i did not know three of the four americans murdered yesterday the day before yesterday but had the pleasure to meet chris stevens and to get to know him long enough to make me wish i had the time to call him my friend and the level straightforward person as he is unforgivable and he loved libya in the
on libya security and how the government is dealing with malicious, tribal conflicts and supporters of former president qadhafi. from the carnegie endowment for international peace, this is nearly two hours. >> good afternoon and welcome to the carnegie endowment. a senior associate in the eastern program here. i am very happy to -- that we were able to bring you a group of knowledgeable speakers about the situation in libya. as we all know, libya has very much been in the headlines in the last few days, but not necessarily -- what emerges from the news coming out of libya is a very confusing situation. on the other hand, the government seems to have little control, very little control on what's going on in the country to the point where they could not prevent an attack on the consulate in benghazi. at the same time the government that is extremely interested in incorporating with united states, extremely insisted to behave the way the government should do in a situation of this sort. in addition, something -- we see that they take a position in favor of government control. and the
bad it is. the arab spring brought corruption and theft of u.s. aid to light in libya and egypt but africa is rife with stories of theft and dictator spoils. nugaema is the son of he can early to new guinea's dictator. he recently ran afoul of french customs who discovered that his chartered chet had 26 supercars on it -- jet had 26 supercars on it including five ferraris, five bentley five rolls royces, and two bughattis. is anybody besides me mad that we're sending foreign aid to african dictators whose sons are importing rolls royces, bentleys ferraris and benghattis to africa and countries who have no electricity? i don't care if you're the biggest humanitarian in the world and you want to help people -- it's not going to the people. the foreign aid is stolen by the leadership of these countries and this isn't one example, this is example after example decade after decade. and the learning curve around here is so slow that we will get 10 maybe 20 senators to place any restrictions on foreign aid. 70% of the people living in africa live under the poverty threshold -- $2 a day
programs. i don't think a solution would involve the u.s. going libya and training people on the ground. that would be too politically sensitive. jordan was an option. there were plenty of different countries that could offer this in that regard. sorry. yes, one more point. ironically given everything we have discuss there had is a sensitivity within the international community of making the army too strong. i know, that sounds weird given everything we've been talking about. we're talking about a country where there has been no military or defense or no civilian oversight. and the chief of staff is doing an excellent job at the moment in terms of asserting authority given the limitation of the army. but at the same time there's no effective civilian way for that the. very quickly the issue of military. that's the biggest problem. we have people who have no experience. and the affairs they are assigned to. with the min stir of defense it has beened because he is [inaudible] he became a defense minister. you have the military itself. is the middle of the bureaucrats who don
known to most of those dispensing the aid. they simply turn a blind eye. except for libya, egypt, and tunisia, where many are saying let's send them money to secularists, now there's a question whether some of that money may be going to radical islamists. with the end of the cold war some were finally cut off. mobutu who i mentioned who comied mr. reid: these atrocious aspects of -- who committed these atrocious aspects of torture. mr. paul: but after 30 years of torturing his own money and stealing everyone blind. foreign aid from developed countries in 2006 totaled $100 billion a year. over the past 50 years, we've given $2 trillion to developed countries in foreign aid. over the past 42 years, easterly states that $568 billion that has flowed to africa, that the per capita growth in income in africa has been flat. in fact, some countries like glimb what abouty where miew gab way was in charge for several decades, the growth rate has been negative. those who say i simply want to help people, help poor people around the world by sending them money, it is stolen by their leaders,
in an attack on the u.s. consolate in libya and would be happy to talk by name about them but their names have not been released at this stage. it does take away how important these jobs are of these foreign service officers. i join president obama in condemning these senseless acts of violence. my thoughts are with the families of those who were killed in this horrible attack it is too often forgotten that american diplomats risk their lives on a daily basis. madam president, when i have had the good fortune since my days in the foreign affairs committee in the house to travel the world, i always make sure wherever i go i visit with foreign service personnel. they're every place. there's no group of people, i tell them that every timist opportunity to visit with them, no one does our country more in a positive sense than these foreign service officers. they work so hard and duty stations most of the times are very, very difficult. take, for example, this good man, ambassador stevens, who was just confirmed a fuel months ago -- a few months ago, he was a peace corps volunteer, he taught englis
have asked this of the author: when you wrote this amendment, disengaging from libya, egypt and pakistan, which is a nuclear-armed nation, did you ask anybody in the intelligence community -- general david petraeus -- if there was ever a hero in modern times, that's him. have you ever asked him or senator chambliss or anybody else, oh, by the way, i'm thinking about pulling the plug on our aid to pakistan, egypt and libya. what's your view of that? have you been asked that question? mr. chambliss: i thank my friend from south carolina as well as my friend from arizona with respect to the debate that they have been engaged in, for bringing this issue to the forefront, being willing to stand up and say, you know, foreign aid, if you talk about that in a coffee club in seneca, south carolina, or phoenix, arizona, or molte, georgia, is not the most popular topic. most people back home think we can balance the budget if we eliminate foreign aid. but the fact is, as senator graham said, it's a minuscule amount in the overall context. right now we're at a critical context with resp
americans in the mosque -- lost this week in libya and keep their families in our frairs and thoughts, it is significant that we come here today in dedication to find every piece of information we can find that will determine how better to keep the americans that serve us so well safe as they try to keep us safe. with that, mr. chairman, i thank you for holding today's hearing. three years ago, on november 5th, 2009, nation was shocked by the mass shooting that the occurred a the l army deployment center located at fort hood, texas. during the shooting 13 lives were lost. 43 individuals were wounded and the lives of so many others were forever changed. later became evident that the warning signs existed well before the tragedy and should have, at the minimum been further investigated. both the fbi, and the democrat of defense had knowledge of the potential as the threat to homeland security. the actions leading up to the mass cur by major nadal the soul suspect should be sparked a greater concern on the part of the officials. yet, dots were not connected. information not shared and t
is this is not just a single crisis management situation. we handled tunisia, libya, egypt and syria. this runs the risk of a meltdown in the middle east. it is a strategic challenge but also a strategic opportunity to try to further emphasize and establish yet another example where sunni and shiite and other minorities are working together to define a common future which is what the middle east needs because elsewhere for hundreds of years the model has been sunni against the at and she again sunni. that won't work. that won't bring stability or a better life for folks and we have an opportunity to establish a different model. we started that in iraq. we need to start that in syria. we need to bring this to an end. >> do you agree? >> i agree with steve emphatically. one of my favorite sayings is virtual presence is actual absence. if you think about how you want these things to come out and we have an interest in that obviously, you have to understand you just cannot sit back and hope. hope is not a strategy. since the fall of the shop of iran particularly in the middle east, the people who h
was killed in libya and discussed the u.k.'s foreign policy developments with russia, syria, libya and iraq. conservative party member richard onway chaired this meeting, it's about two hours. >> order. can i welcome members of the public to this session of the foreign affairs select committee which is conducting an inquiry into developments in u.k. foreign policy. and i'm delighted to welcome the foreign secretary here, um, as the key witness. it's the fifth time he's given evidence to us in this parliament. the last time was in march of this year. can i, also, welcome his two colleagues, david quarry who's the director of the mideast/north africa division and matthew rye cough who's the operations manager. gentlemen, thank you very much for coming this morning. foreign security, as you might imagine, there's a heck of a lot we could be going through here, and very much want to focus on syria, iran and afghanistan. but we think in light of developments in the last 24 hours of afghanistan, we might start with afghanistan. can i ask the very essential question as to the extent to which you w
the constitution, or we will end up like olivia and egypt -- libya. i know this and say that god bless america. we have a wonderful candidate. let's get behind him. his name is mitt romney. he has these values to restore that which is the jobs that have been lost. he knows how to do it. we just need to get behind them. and i say these things and i hope everybody gets out and votes on november 6 and exercises their vote. >> host: onto the democrat callers, and west hartford, connecticut, it's bill. >> caller: hi, this is built from west hartford, connecticut, and i'm at proud liberal progressive democrat as well as an atheist on religious matters. i want to give the liberal and ago to ribs in a nonreligious people, atheists and agnostics on this values voter summit that i just love. i think they should change their name, for example, my first point, to the impose your values voters by legislation summit. we do have a separation of church and state, a lawless separation of church and state which thomas jefferson and james madison were instrumental with when the constitution was written and ratified,
have to be involved. we have to ask ourself in which we away have to be evolved in the case of libya, for example, the way nato was. i myself wasn't very a bbc and, you know, gaffe -- we are going to kill the people in benghazi. and he said he's going kill. he was going kill. [inaudible] what do we have to do? i was no no-fly zone. i wanted i think that today in syria, it's very, very, very disappointing to see we are not doing anything. it's as if we have agreed to disagree on this and let. be the way it was with the syrians. i'm not saying we have to be passive. we have to be respectful and we should not intervene only to protect the interest in libya. it was a clear it was deal between the united states and france. i think in syria we have to care about the people being killed and not the strategic interest which is i think is the case today. >> i'm a journalist from egypt visiting d.c., and returning back again to cover the i i did i did diad.a. lem that. you said that the islamist in egypt say that the -- [inaudible] this is not the case. [inaudible] to islam and what can be sol
for susan rice, helped to rally support for action in libya where the u.s. helped topple regimes and threatened to commit large-scale killing. she went the other direction at area with president upon the persistent calls for intervention there is thousands die in the fight against the government of president bashar al-assad. >> guest: one comments an election year for president said they would not be genetic action until a new administration comes in, either romney or barack obama in the second term. secondly, the administration has been certainly cautious about a sort of intervention, military intervention in syria. libya and syria are apples and oranges that they are quite different. libya was isolated regionally and internationally in a way that syria is not. it has the support of her rant, support russia as well as other countries that complicate the regional level and international level. finally, there've been calls to record the safe havens. i'm not a military expert, but everyone i console say that requires a no-fly zone. syria has mr. advanced and sophisticated system pr
aid to egypt, pakistan and libya. as i watched our flag being shredded by a gloating mob at the walls of the american embassy in cairo, i shared with fellow hoosiers and americans a sense of sadness and deep anger. that mob and the one that led to the death of four american diplomats in libya, including our ambassador, were those that stormed our embassies throughout the muslim world showed us again how much contempt and disrespect those people have for the united states and for americans. many in those countries clearly still hate us. as displayed on our thrigz this past week, the arab spring is evolving into a very bleak winter. events this past year and especially this past week in the middle east and north africa continue to present us with enormous challenges. we have mishandled them badly. no one should be deluded enough to see it in any other way. the best judge of a policy is the results, and by that measure, our report card is found among the ashes of the consulate in benghazi. the questions the administration and this body must answer soon is how best to react to this failur
. after that, kentucky senator rand paul talks about his bill to cut u.s. aid to pakistan, libya, and egypt. then, live coverage as the senate returns for votes on the continuing resolution to my aid to middle east countries, and the so-called sportsmen's bill. tomorrow on washington journal, correspondent david ingram reviews the justice department's inspector general report on fast and furious. warrants michele, president of the economic policy institute discusses how american families are doing in today's economy. retired colonel frederick sleigh he talks about this week's cyber -based attacks at bank of america and j.p. morgan chase that kept banks from doing business. washington channel live at 7:00 a.m. eastern on it c-span. >> when i first came down to washington and did not know what an ig did. my experience as a prosecutor, we seldom, occasionally would run into a large force of arms. they would be our agents. for while i was doing mortgage right cases. and i was dealing with the inspector general which was of very good law enforcement agent, but did not of the big pictu
to sustain in the future but it will be in the tens of billions beyond 2014. even though libya was the triumph of limited uses of force there hasn't been repeat performance. an easy way to decide wars in their favor. in yemen by now, would have been ushered in by their effectiveness but that hasn't happened. as much as they are important, because all these controversies rightly so they are not always going to be a silver bullet. >> the drones we have today, primarily only e useful in a permissive environment where we have taken out the air defense as we did in libya or there are no air defenses and we own the air space like iraq and afghanistan. that makes these systems able to operate. they cannot operate, vast majority of them cannot operate in a benign environment with service to air missiles to shoot them down and relatively defenseless. if we are going to maintain this advantage we are going to increasingly shift their technology to invest more -- better protected. >> that is an interesting example of a big topic in defense. one of the core questions for the next four to e
, the attacks last week in libya that took the lives of ambassador stevenson three other americans in libya that took the lives of ambassador stevenson three other americans in libya that took the lives of ambassador stevenson three other americans war are, colorado the lives of ambassador stevenson three other americans war, colorado and oak creek wisconsin's demonstrate we must remain vigilant and prepared and certainly, our thoughts are with those impacted by the senseless attacks. >> i have some questions about the implementation of this training change. various descriptions of it in response to the msn's of my fun -- [inaudible] [no audio] >> the will come to order. i apologize to running late, even though it doesn't appear as a lot is happening around here. i'm sorry for the competing process. i want to thank everyone for coming. i'm very, very pleased to welcome robert stephen beecroft, was a career foreign service officer nominated by president obama to be our ambassador to iraq. and i think all of us on the committee are pleased the president has nominated somebody of high caliber,
libya that we've just lost our brave ambassador and the majority leader wants to have 60 minutes equally divided? and with no one allowed to have any amendments, second-degree, side-by-side? and then says republicans are at fault? well, i tell you, i've watched this senate, i say to the majority leader, deteriorate in a way that's almost spectacular. and now here we are on the day before the majority leader wants us to go out of session and we're supposed to just have a vote on an amendment that has the most profound effect on this nation's security with 60 minutes, equally divided. i don't have a smile on my face. i don't have a smile on my face, i tell the majority leader. i have a look of incredible dismay and disgust. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. reid: it would seem to me that the senator's concern should be directed towards senator paul, not me. we have -- and it sounds to me that he may vote against the paul amendment, from basically what i heard. and if he's that concerned about it, i think we should get it up and have a -- if he wants more time, we'd be happy t
is a starting point. once you start to analyze what is likely to happen in libya next, what is liable to happen in egypt next, and what's label to happen in serious next, you get very defendant scenarios based on the legacy of geeing agraph. geeing agraphy shows libya was never a country but a vague geographical expression, with tripoli and tunisia, and because it was never a country it can only be governed through the most austere totalitarian means, and once that collapsed, though we have an elected government in tripoli, it cannot project power beyond greater tripoli. so you have a problem of governmental incapacity in libya that cannot deal with the crisis. in egypt it's different. egypt you have a country that has been an age-old cluster of civilization for thousands of years. a cohesive community along the nile, where the government has far greater bureaucratic and institutional power even under this new regime than the government in libya has. the government in egypt has an army. it has police forces. but its problem is political. can an islamic government take actions against islamic de
and the chinese government, they didn't like what was done in libya where after the non-fly zone, this was used to enter, and they were completely dismissed and just nowhere in the libyan picture because now it's divided between the states, qatar, the united kingdom and france. so the starts point is really much about politics and gee o yo strategy -- geostrategy. what happened afterwards is that all the reading of these political challenges were read in sectarian mode. and by saying, and, you know, in my web site and even when i wrote the book, i got so many criticism and insults coming from muslims saying, in fact, you support the resistance because you are sunni, and you like the qatar i/saudi monarchies. and on the other side people who are from the shia tradition saying we support bashar al assad because he's a supporter of, you know, palestinians and at the same time the shia tradition. and it became something which is a sectarian reading of the whole thing. and i think it's very dangerous. i allocated one south carolina in the book about this divide between shia and sunni by saying it's
about the recent attack on the american consulate in libya. here is a look. >> for american foreign aid to be more effective if it has got to embrace the principles that you see in these global initiatives. the power of partnerships, access to the trans formative nature of free enterprise and no leverage of the abundant resources that come in the private sector. i believe there are three legitimate object of foreign aid in this country. first is to address humanitarian needs such as the case of medical treatment to millions suffering from hiv aids. second is to foster a substantial united states strategic interests. perhaps military or diplomatic or economic. third is another purpose and one that i think has to receive much more attention and higher priority. in a romney administration and that is aid that elevates people and brings about lasting change in communities and nations. here is an example. a lot of americans including myself are troubled by developments in the middle east. syria has witnessed the killing of tens of thousands of people. the presidents of egypt is a member of t
mysterious. obama says we have to prevent genocide and uses force against libya. the number of people killed by gadhafi at that point was about 250. meanwhile over at period of many months, tens of thousands of people have been killed in syria and obama absolutely refuses to use force. what explains why he intervenes over here but not over there? obama has been very active in egypt in pushing mubarak out of power. not only that, but now there's a power struggle going on with the military, and the muslim brotherhood, the obama administration is intervening on the side of the muslim brotherhood. obama has warned the egyptian military, you better turn over power to the muslim brotherhood or we are going to cut off military aid. so obama can say i am a champion of democracy. these people were freely elected and get a year earlier, in 2009 when there were massive demonstrations, bigger than in tahrir square, in iran, calling for democracy, the end of the free election, obama flatly refuse to support the democrats. he said we have got to stay out of this. there's this big debate going on in iraq.
the attack on benghazi and clearly condemned these actions against america. contrast that with libya for a moment. libya had an election as well where two-thirds of the libyan people rejected the islamists and they elected pro-western, pro-modern, pro-progress leaders to their government. but unlike egypt, libya doesn't have the ability to protect our consulate as well. they didn't inherit from qadhafi a well-organized security apparatus. in fact, it was one of the reasons why i argued for a more forceful american engag engagemn libya. i didn't want the conflict to last that long. that protracted and long conflict in lib ya what it did is create more time and more space for these independent militias, these are literally independent gangs that got their hands on weapons and fought in this resolution against qadhafi. but now the central government can't get these groups to give up their arms because to do so would be to give up their power. that's why having this thing go on for as long as it did which was a terrible idea. the fact is, though, the libyans don't even have control over
as we had in libya and egypt, or it can be a political mistake. i learned that the hard way when i was a junior campaign staffer working for mike dukakis and was there at the moment when he was climbing into that tank. so i'm here to tell you that you can shake up the race all kinds of ways when it comes to national security. back then in 1988, democrats were in the middle of a 30-year, 35-point deficit when it came to voter trust on national security. that security gap began in the aftermath of the vietnam war and persisted very stubbornly until about 2008 when it closed up due mostly to republican mistakes. voters were tired of the iraq war, tired of the kind of blundering that they had perceived in the bush administration and decided that both parties, there was kind of a pox on both houses. what's been very interesting -- and third way has been partnering with our own polling and focus groups for the last seven years -- is that if you look at this slide, that's the security gap. if you extend it out to the left, it gets wide and absolutely consistent going all the way back to a
and his courageous embassy staff have lost their lives in benghazi and in libya in a cruel, cold and gruesome intentional terror attack and all the while the response of this administration has communicated both weakness and lack of resolve to the world. [applause] and a top official seems in credulously apparently convinced that the only way to curtail this crisis is to put a full frontal attack on their free-speech free speech rights of american citizens. [applause] i want to be perfectly clear, this isn't just about a movie. this was an intentional act that was done by radical islamists who seek to impose their beliefs on the rest of the world, and we will not stand for it. [applause] [applause] no one here is suggesting that all muslims are radical, but we should not be ignorant of the objective reality that there is a very radical wing of islam that is dedicated to the destruction of america, of israel and of israel's allies. what we are watching develop before our eyes today are the direct consequences of this administration's policy of apology and appeasement across the gl
amendments that i wish to call down. first, not one penny should be sent to libya until the assassins are delivered to justice. not one penny should go to egypt until they guarantee the safety and protection of our embassies. and, second, not one more penny should go to pakistan until the doctor who helped us get bin laden is freed. is it too much to ask of the senate -- i'm more than willing to cooperate. i'm more than willing to let those go home who want to go home and campaign. i know it's going to be a tough election for the other side. but the thing is, i'm more than willing to let you go home any time. i do this because it's important that our allies act like allies. it's important that we have a vote, that this senate go on record and say, do you support the american taxpayer, do you want to help the man who helped us get bin laden? and so, mr. president, i ask unanimous consent to set aside the pending amendments and call up amendment 2783 and also another amendment that is at the desk and yet to be numbered. the presiding officer: is there an objection? the majority leader.
as i believe every american was that what occurred in both egypt and libya. in egypt, the embassy was overrun. by cops. the egyptian cops didn't protect the embassy. and libya the military, libbey military, libyan cops ran away. didn't protect the embassy. and in addition and worst of all was the fact that the ambassador was murdered, killed so to speak. i'm not sure exactly how, whether he was succeeded at how it actually occurred. along with three other consular personnel. that i did not believe that the american response was adequate. the egyptian -- strike that. the american embassy in egypt initially put out a statement which was denunciatory of the video that some muslims were saying was the reason for the attacks, and was not sufficiently denunciatory of the egyptian government, in my judgment, then hillary put out a significant statement which was followed then by the white house repudiating the american embassy as state income and making a statement calling the egyptian government to task. in libya, we were more conciliatory because the libyan president had denounced the
was that what occurred in both egypt and libya. in egypt the embassy was overrun. the egyptian copts ran away and did not protect the embassy in libya the military, the libyan military, libyan cops ran away. it did not protect the embassy. worst of all was the fact that the ambassador was murdered, killed. i'm not sure exactly how, whether he expects heated or how it actually occurred. along with three other personnel. and i did not believe that the american response was adequate. the egyptian defense strike at the american embassy in egypt initially put out a statement which was denunciatory of the video that some muslims were saying was the reason for the tax. and was not sufficiently denunciatory of the egyptian government in my judgment. then hillary put out a magnificent statement which was followed then by that white house repudiating the american embassy statement and making a statement calling the egyptian government's task. in libya, there were even more conciliatory because the libyan prisoner had denounced the attack. but that's not adequate. if the libyan government cannot control
used trial and in yemen, somalia. it appears they have used terms in the philippines and in libya as well. now, libya is an interesting case because when there were discussions among the public about the pros and cons of the u.s. intervening in libya, there is one thing that was really left out of the equation and that was whether or not it was a good thing to get involved militarily to overthrow gadhafi. the way in which it was done is to cut congress altogether and the administration's just vacation or not even bringing this up for a discussion in congress is when it's just an air war that we are using drugs and new of u.s. lives are at risk of a congress should have no say and not. so think of the kind of usurpation of power by the executive ranch, taken this away from the legislative ranch and what kind of precedent is set for future people in the white house. we have also been a case of a rat, when the u.s. troops left, left drones behind and put them in the hands not of the military, but the state department. so we have the diplomatic branch of our government in iraq having
ambassador who was killed in libya. and, you know, i would mourn any united states ambassador who was killed in the line of duty, but it makes it even harder when we know that this one was doing such a great job. christopher stevens hadgien his wife, real -- had given his life, really, to try to make peace and to try to be a force for the poisive in th positive e east. and he was our ambassador libya. and i am sad to say that it appears that this was a plot -- it was not an accident, it wasn't something that happened because he happened to be in the consulate; it apparently was a premeditated murder of our ambassador, and i know the whole country mourns the loss of someone who tries so hard to do what is right and to have this happen. so, i want to pay my respects to him and to all who knew and worked with him and to say that, in my travel that i have been so fofortunate to make as a united states senator, i am so impressed with the representatives of the united states in our embassies and consulates throughout the world. our foreign service representatives of our country do a fabulous job,
. how can libya control and let the world know we are serious about democracy? they have a real problem. left behind -- destruction. we need to start a very good police force and good communication and training and 10,000. .. then we should be able to create the force. that will help us secure our country and our people. without government showing middle east, north africa, maybe some other places, the government has to show, otherwise people will not obey law and orders. again, my apologies to the american people. it is a sad day in our history. and we hope that we still have the support of the united states and other friends to help libya get through from this terrible critical situation. thank you. >> thank you very much ambassador. and thank you very much to all of you. i am very grateful for your cooperation and participation in this debate. please feel free to write, to come, to see me, to complain, preach, whatever you want to do. i more than happy. it's our job, we are open. we would ke to see all of you again very soon. thank you very much. [applause] >> join us monday for more
of our most solid allies, producing enormous amounts of intelligence operating in libya in the broader middle east. of course, was taken out. meanwhile, regimes that are enemies of the united states by karen to me as nothing to say about the revolt by the iranian people against that terrorist regime in 2009. could not even spare a word of moral support, never mind material support. you see the same thing happening in syria, although now guess what, the moslem brotherhood is preparing to take over. mark my words. i can tell you what happens. now that the brother had is at least equipped to take over control, you will see president obama, secretary of state clinton began to move on syria. maybe take a little military action, maybe have turkey initiate a response to my take out. guess what, the glorious rebels that we have so romanticized in the west will take over. in egypt, libya, and watch in syria. the entire middle east is falling to the islamists, and you have to read my book to find out why. i argue the president is more than thrilled with that outcome. in fact, he had to top musli
have to prevent genocide, and he uses force against libya. the number of people killed by gadhafi, at that point, was 250. meanwhile, over a period of many months, tens of thousands of of people killed in syria, and obama absolutely refuses to use force. what explains why he intervenes with force here, but not over there? obama has been active in egypt in pushing mubarak out of power. not only that, but now that there's a power struggle going on between the military and the muslim brotherhood, the obama administration is intervening on the side of the muslim brotherhood warning the egyptian military turn over power to the muslim brotherhood, or we'll cut off military aide. he can say he's a champion of democracy. these people were freely elected, and, yet, a year earlier in 2009, when there were massive demonstrations, bigger than in that her square -- tahir square in teheran calling for democracy, call for free elections, obama flatly refusioned to support the democrats saying we have to stay out of this. there's a debate going on in iran. let them settle it. it was settled with
or own their own firearms, so guess who has the guns? the cartels, and their mowing everyone down. libya is another example of this. what happened when gadhafi, when the uprising happened. people were getting mowed down. same thing is happening in syria. and so i'm all about people. you know, a constitutional right, and there's a reason for it. it's pretty laid out and simple. yes. >> i'm from -- [inaudible] university. what's kind of baffled me throughout this whole thing is still how eric holder has his job. [laughter] >> i don't know. >> the president's david axle rod, these are great guys, politically savvy guys. i mean, is it -- alberto gonzalez was crucified for a scandal much, much less serious. do you just think it's because the media perception is lukewarm? the stuff i
though libya was the trium of limited -- triumph of limited uses of force, there hasn't been a repeat performance since. and if drones were the easy way to decide wars in our favor, we would have seen progress, presumably, in syria, yemen or mali by now, and yet that hasn't r hasn't happened. so as much as they are an important tool, as peter said, as much as they cause all these controversies -- rightly so, as peter said -- they are not always going to be a silver bullet. >> can i just add one point to that? also the drones we have today, the uavs we have today are primarily only useful in a permissive air environment where we've already either taken out the air defenses as we did in libya or where we already own the air space like in iraq and afghanistan. that's what makes these systems able to operate. they cannot operate, many of them that we have right now, the vast majority of them cannot operate in a denied environment where you've got surface to air fissiles that could target them and shoot them down. they're relatively defenseless. so i think if we're going to maintain this a
. >> governor kaine, turning to libya, there's been reports in recent days suggesting the u.s. consulate in benghazi may not have enough security to spice mornings of heightened despair. you think the obama administration could've handled this situation better either before or after that attack? kaine: i don't know the details and we've got to study at ensure the answer to the question is yes. when something goes wrong there's always something you could have done better. en i was governor my darkest day was april of 2007 when there was a shooting at virginia tech. the most significant crime in the history of the state. and i just landed in japan on a trade mission and then i got right back on the plane and flew back. i spend time dealing with grieving family members in that community. and what i said from day one is we're going to put in place a panel of people with a broad expertise have no connection of virginia tech and we will have them turn it upside down to determine everything that could've been done different. so we cn minimize the chance that anything like that will ever happen
government and the chinese government department like what was done in libya. where after the nonfry zone it was used to enter completely dismissed and just nowhere in the libyan picture because it's divided between the states, can kandahar, the united nations, and france. and the starting point is about politics and go yo strategy. what happened afterwords is that all the readings of the political challengers where in sectarian mode. by saying and, you know, in my website and even when i wrote the book, i got so many criticism insults coming from muslims saying in fact you support the resistance because you sunni. and you like the saudi monarchies. and on the other side people from the shii had tradition saying we support bashar allah is sad because he's a supporters of the palestinian and the shii had tradition. became something which is a sectarian reading the of the whole thing. i think it's very dangerous. i allocated one section in the book about this between she had and sowne. it's one of the great challenging of our comings years. i don't see enough scholars and intellectuals. i d
that was likely to spill over the borders of syria, and affect the whole region. syria is not libya. people tend to make simplistic comparisons. syria, unlike libarch will not implode. syria could explode and explode beyond its borders and create problems for everybody, and i felt i had to try. i gave it a shot. i did my best. but of course in the end, i had to let go because the government in particular was intransgent. the opposition had also picked up arms, and there was increasing militarization of the conflict. the region was divided, and the security council that gave me the mandate were also divided, even though i tried very hard to bring them together. the last effort was a meeting in geneva on the 30th of june, where i brought together the foreign ministers, the permanent members of the security council, so they were all in general have no extra, with the foreign ministers of iraq, turkey, kuwait, qatar, and the secretaries general of the league of rfc and the u.n., and we came to an agreement on political settlement that you need political transition, and went further, and even defined
is not libya. people tend to make some simplistic comparisons. serial will not implode. area could explode beyond the borders. and create problems for everybody. and i felt that i had to try. i gave it a shot. i did my best. but, of course, in the end, i have to let go because the government in particular was in transit. their position had also picked up, and there was increasing militarization of the conflict. the region was divided in the security council gave me the mandate was also divided, even though i tried very hard to bring them together. the last effort was meeting in geneva on the 30th of june where i brought together the foreign ministers and the members of the security council. iraq, turkey, kuwait, and the secretaries general in the u.n. we came to an agreement on political settlement that we needed political transition. we need to define what it meant. that will mean an interim government with full political powers. forces of topknot leadership. that will manage continuity and services so that you don't have chaotic collapse. the moment you begin talking up interim governmen
in libya yesterday with mainstream moderate libyan democrat took on the bad guys themselves. that's a great thing, a wonderful sign, and a hopeful sign for the future. >> host: michael, anything to add to that viewer in atlanta? >> guest: yes. we both believe that it is important for the united states to play an expansive role, important for america and people of other countries, and that costs money, and it's going to be difficult to find the money with whars coming. the wars we fought in the last decade in afghanistan and iraq, they were expensive, controversial, probably always be controversial, but we ought to recognize as well that the biggest obligations we have, the greatest pressure on taxpayers and on our fiscal policy comes not from those wars or policies people disagree about, but the policies we all believe in, programs everybody wants, namely social security and especially medicare, and unless and until we find ways to reform those programs to make them more affordable, we're going to continue to have trouble, both abroad and at home. >> host: and the last call for our two gues
of in the balkans in libya and now gearing up for serial with republicans of course endorsing it. it seems to there is something very profound work in both parties that, -- on the right or the left and the mainstream parties that want to respond to two killing somebody. you know, from your vantage point again to get a republican parties, why is that the democrats in some cases are as bad or worse as the republicans fired when it comes to this sort of thing? >> they tend to say me to boast that they last. that is part of our one and a half party system. it does distressed me, perhaps the rationale or the reason for it is i mean, they all represent elite interests. and when any sort of militarized empire, which is kind of what we've come starts to go down how, starts to have serious problems with its dad, their reaction isn't to say, well let's pull back. their reaction is to double down on the very policies that got them into the mass in the first place. it is abnormal psychology but it's the only way i can explain it. >> the ultimate question is why have we gotten in this mess in the last
and the victims of the horrific bombing that -- attack, i should say, that happened in libya and that it is now time to remember all of the men and women who serve our country abroad in these embassies and to thank them for their service and hope for their protection. mr. president, on a chilly day in january of 2009, americans watched with pride as barack obama stood before the nation and took the presidential oath of office. for some, that experience was another milestone in a long journey to ensure that america lives up to the ideas that this country was built for everyone. the election of an african-american president shattered a barrier that many thought would never happen. the american struggle for civil rights has produced many seminal moments. rosa parks and the montgomery bus boycott, martin luther king and the march on washington, jackie robinson stepping up to the plate for the first time. but before all of these events, there were the tuskegee airmen, and george hickman, a washington resident and a tuskegee airman was truly part of america's greatest generation. they were the cataly
. as wall pause to think of the families of the four americans who were lost just this week in libya and keep their families and our prayers and thoughts, it is significant that we come here today and dedication, every piece of them permission we can find that will determine how better to keep the americans that serve us so well safe as they try to keep us safe. with that, mr. chairman, i think you for holding today's hearing. three years ago on november november 5th 2009 the nation was shocked by the mass shooting that occurred at the army deployment center located at fort hood, texas. during the shooting 30 lives were lost to of 43 individuals were wounded. the lives of so many others were forever changed. it later became evident that the warning signs existed well before the tragedy and should have, at a minimum, in further investigated. but the fbi and the department of defense had knowledge of the potential as a threat, and security. the actions leading up to the massacre should have been unequivocably cost far greater concern on the part of officials, yet doubts were not connec
in libya and keep their families and our prayers. it's significant that we come here today and dedication to find pieces of information we can find to determine how better to keep the americans that serve us so well safe as they try to keep us safe so with that mr. chairman think keefer will in today's hearing. three years ago in november 5th, 2009 the nation was shocked by the mass shooting that occurred at the deployment center in fort hood texas. during the shooting 13 lives were lost, 43 individuals were wounded and the lives of so many others were forever changed. it became evident the warning signs existed before the tragedy and should have at a minimum been investigated. they had knowledge of major hasan's potential threat to homeland security. the actions leading up to the massacre by the major species, the sole suspect in the murder should have been stopped on a greater concern on the part of officials yet the botts routt connected. integration wasn't shared and the lack of the policies and protocols led to the colossal breakdown in communication. in december 2009 at the directio
recently in libya and other countries and that's happening in every end, there's a lot of trouble throughout the world and we need to make sure whatever we do, that were involved in the process. but the president comes to congress, lays out what the grammar case. we have a full understanding a survivor to win and make sure we go forward into a together to unify this country because were in trouble. a lot of things happening overseas that are unsettling right now. i know i'm running out of time. >> criteria for military intervention in afghanistan. >> thank you, john. this is a question personal for me. all through my rather served in the military. my oldest brother was career military, 288 combat missions in vietnam. i know what families do when someone is deployed overseas. it's really tough on everyone. our military is just amazing. very strong, resourceful, get anything done we asked them to do. but that means we have to be careful when we asked them. we estimate interests are anywhere around the globe, when we see direct threats, when we have a plan -- not only a plan to invad
and, again i'm glad to see we're phasing out of afghanistan. on the issue of libya today, stunning the lack of coordination between the intelligence community and the state department and now that we're reacting when we could have been proactive, didn't have a marine corp. attachment on the ground, in tripoli, the embassy, pretended it was a permissive environment, which was stunning to me costing the lives of the u.s. ambassador and two of his co-workers. with that said, let me put a question out to the united states marine corp.. with our ability to respond in the region with fast teams and ops how to sequester and impact that capability? >> what we make every effort to do is ensure the current operations don't suffer so the expectation would be that the marines in information are support teams in the forces necessary to do the things you eluded to a minute ago, would be resourced. where you see the price being paid is units at home station, again, already in the greatest state of readiness. this further exacerbates that readiness, but does not affect the readiness of forces depl
of lives, not about pushing cookies and pinstripes. do you think the situation in libya, in retrospect, should have had more of a crossover between the militaristic end? paul corson with cnn. thank you. >> bill goodfellow, center for international policy. what are we doing to promote a political settlement? as distasteful as it might seem, i think some sort of deal with the taliban has to be put in place or else the civil war's going to continue, and even the good enough, afghanistan good enough that you suggest, i just don't see it's possible. they're tenacious, they're not about to be defeated as long as they have pakistan's backing, and i just think that much more emphasis has to be put on a political -- [inaudible] >> great, great questions, all. we have seen and i referred to them protests in afghanistan before over perceived affronts to islam. you know, what has just occurred doesn't really surprise me, and i think there's going to be trouble in pakistan too. you know, there's kind of a fuse on these things. you know, libya's a wildcard because we still don't know that much about
in libya and keep their families in our prayers and thoughts, it is significant that we come here today in dedication to find every piece of information we can find that will determine how better to keep the americans that serve us so well safe as they try to keep us safe. so with that, mr. chairman, i thank you for o holding today's hearing. three years ago on november 5, 2009, the nation was shocked by the maas shooting -- mass shooting that occurred at the army deployment center located at fort hood, texas. during the shooting 13 lives were lost, 43 individuals were wounded, and the lives of so many others were forever changed. it later became evident that the warning signs existed well before the tragedy and should have at a minimum been further investigated. both the fbi, the department of defense had knowledge of major hasan's potential as a threat to homeland security. the actions leading up to the massacre by major nidal malik hasan, is sole suspect, should have unequivocally sparked a greater concern, yet dots were not connected, information was not shared, and the lack of form
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 80 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)